Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Nokia (NOK) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: quartersawyer who wrote (8573)	12/16/2000 8:26:52 PM
From: Eric L	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 34857

chapq, << Without the 112kbps, there is a weak comparison against 1xRTT not to mention EV >> Aren't we mixing metaphors (2.5G/3G)? <g> GPRS is a 2.5G data overlay allowing early 2nd generation network reuse of a GSM network in a cost effective manner, in existing (non IMT-2000 3G designated) spectrum. 1xRTT (as currently in commercial test at SKT) is clearly a 2.5G implementation even though our favorite spinmeisters at CDG and QUALCOMM hype it as 3G. This is especially interesting since the currently available QUALCOMM chipset (MSM 5000) is NOT even compliant to the IS-2000 IMT-2000 specification and will not be until the MSM 5105 ships. QUALCOMM has never issued a press release on this product. The latest QUALCOMM roadmap shows it kind of vaguely out around next quarter. We don't even know if its sampling. This looks like is kind of a Hype Cover up. 3G 1xEV has great promise ... BUT it is slideware. Vaporware as mQ would say. 3G 1xEV-DV is at least 7 months from completing standardization. General deployment will be minimum 1 year after that, and realistically 6 to 12 months longer. 1xEV currently has four carrier backers (according to recent corporate presentations made by Dr Irwin and Dr. Paul) and cdmaOne has less than a dozen major networks up and running in relatively few countries.. It is estimated that upwards of 60% of the current GSM carriers will implement GPRS commercially by the end of 2001. These carriers operate 373 networks in 161 countries and have a subscriber base of close to 420 million. They collectively have 68.5% of the World's digital market and 60.6% of the World's wireless market. These carriers are committed to global roaming (voice and data) and when they implement GPRS most will use SMS roaming and GRX. These carriers participate in a standards body called 3GPP where they plan their 2.5G & 3G future making sure that they focus on interoperability every much as data transmission speeds. CDG & QUALCOMM do not participate in this body and react rather than proact to initiatives there. There are vary few carrier members of 3GPP that would think of considering commercially implementing a migration step not standardized by that body. By contrast CDMA operators have made few strides in implementing network to network interoperability even with each other and particularly when it comes to voice roaming, SMS and data roaming. As a QCOM shareholder, I question whether or not 1xEV-DO which is currently standardized by TIA/EIA as IS-856 "CDMA2000 High Rate Packet Data Air Interface Specification" will have large take up by even existing cdmaOne carriers. They (at least some of the few) may wait for the completion of the 1xEV-DV standard and approval of same by the ITU. << Without the 112 kbps, there is a weak comparison against 1xRTT not to mention EV >> Forget EV for the moment. It is Vaporware and it is 3G. Lets talk 2.5G, and technologies that are in limited commercial deployment (1xRTT & GPRS). How fast is 1xRTT (IS-2000A Phase ZERO)? Not peak rate. Typical user rate. I don't know. Do you? I'm guessing < 64 kbps on the downlink. What is your estimate? We know that GPRS handsets are operating today (not necessarily well) at approximately 20Kbps when using two timeslots (before data compression and optimization). John Hoffman recently stated that "actual throughput speeds with applications, CS2 coding and a four timeslot terminal is being confirmed to be 40 or so kilo-bits per second. Then with compression you can double it or triple it depending on what your compression mechanisms are". Having listened to John over the last 6 years and also having listened to Perry LaForge for the same period of time, I will simply say to you that John has a tendency to understate and Perry a tendency to overstate. Let us suppose that a medium speed data service were available to you today from your CDMA provider. What would you do with it (given todays WAP enabled mobile wireless devices and available data services) and what would you be willing to pay for the service given fully optimized downlink speeds of: * 40 kbps * 64 kbps * 112 to 128 kbps * > 128 kbps If no bundled flat rates were offered would you pay by the packet at the current rates of AWS partner BT Cellnet (see previous post)? What is your "Killer App"? Mine is corporate e-mail and replication of Notes on a corporate server. > 128 kbps would be great, but right now I'll take 40 to 64 kbps if reasonably priced and provided I have a WID to use it. It is my contention that at this early stage of the game, raw speed is not what will win the contest. carriers are making decisions on interoperability. Best, - Eric -